Re: Two more RI fast-path issues

From: Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Lucas Jeffrey <luquijeffrey(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Two more RI fast-path issues
Date: 2026-10-21 06:10:59
Message-ID: CA+HiwqGku5GPYkWmhrRyggEqLvMrahV3ZxwHpMvTAh3K_Mcxyw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Oct 20, 2026 at 10:45 AM Amit Langote <amitlangote09(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2026 at 9:49 Lucas Jeffrey <luquijeffrey(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Amit
>> About the reentrant RI check that frees a plan already in use, in this
>> thread I already created a fix and it had a backfix for all supported
>> branches:
>> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/CAGHzy7S0XfXdK3amd5c4QhpS1o9dySVzPr+-d9ohaE4iV_vNog(at)mail(dot)gmail(dot)com
>>
>> It has this entry in the current commitfest:
>> https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6825/
>
>
> Ah, thanks for reminding me of it. I didn’t realize it’s chasing the same issue essentially.
>
> I’ll take a look and reply over there.

FTR, I've posted the patch to that thread and will continue the
discussion there. That thread has a title more relevant to the issue
and the patch.

--
Thanks, Amit Langote

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Previous Message Henson Choi 2026-10-21 06:04:01 Re: [DEPARSE] Operators on ROW() constructors read back as row comparisons